Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 10:36 AM) All I said is if he was as great as he thinks, he would be working for a MLB team. You said the 80 hour a week thing made him walk away. If that is true, the guys working the 80 hour weeks should have a more informed opinion, correct? The 80 hour week thing was just an example of the type of thing that might prevent someone from accepting a job. I'm just trying to illustrate that it's erroneous to assume that he is incapable of taking a job solely because he doesn't currently hold that job. There are lots of reasons that people choose their jobs, they don't simply accept anything offered to them.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 10:30 AM) If you think writing a blog and doing a chat on ESPN.com shows he has the talent to work for a MLB team, you're wrong. I wouldn't dare make that claim, I'm not qualified to judge either way. You're the only one that's trying to tell us how Keith Law compares to ML scouts. I haven't interviewed him for a job -- have you?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 10:04 AM) If that job requires 80 hours a week, how could his opinion be informed when he's not working anywhere near that? Are there specifics examples over the years of Law's opinion being superior ? And if his opinions were superior working whatever he was working, I'm sure a team would offer him a job paying him more money, working the same amount of hours he's working now, for exclusive rights to those opinions. If you're asking me if he's the best talent evaluator in America, I would say that no one thinks that. But if you're implying that the fact he does not work for an MLB team is sufficient proof that he doesn't have the talent to work for an MLB team, you are wrong.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 08:38 AM) If he really was the player evaluating genius he thinks he is, he would be putting an MLB organization together, not doing chats for espn.com. This is absolutely not a valid argument. Working for a team and working in the media are drastically different lifestyles and it it not at all unreasonable to want to be ESPN's Keith Law rather than an anonymous member of the Astros working 80 hours a week.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 08:27 AM) It's ridiculous to want to have the worst record in baseball for several years or one of the worst because it usually won't work out in the end. People become so dissinterested in your team, if the players you draft turn out to be any good, you wind up unable to pay them. The last time the Sox went into a full rebuild, they struck it rich in the first round 4 years in a row. McDowell was the 5th pick in 1987. Griffey Jr. was #1, so it obviously paid off to be the worst team that year. The other 3 before McDowell weren't special, in fact, had the Sox had the 4th or 3rd pick, they really wanted Mike Harkey. In 1988, the Sox drafted Robin Ventura with the 10th pick. Look at the picks before him, and tell me how it paid off not to lose even more games. Frank Thomas was #7 in 1989. There were some decent players before him, Ben McDonald went #1, but if the Sox drafted higher, they really wanted Jeff Jackson, a guy who never played in the major leagues, and Frank obviously was ultimately the best player of that draft. They did get Alex Fernandez with the 4th pick in 1990 and there is where it may have paid off to draft that high, however, Mike Mussina was selected with the 20th pick. There are really good players in every draft outside of the top 5 picks. It took teams like Tampa and Pittsburgh many years before their draft positions really paid off, and even they have made mistakes. If losing 100 games nets you Tim Beckham, it makes zero sense to try embrace being bad. The Sox are going to draft high the next draft, but I think we all should hope its the last time they draft in the top 5 or 10 for quite some time. I don't think any of this changes the point I'm making, which is that each class is different. My point also doesn't argue against you saying that a team shouldn't tank every year. I'm not saying they should.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 08:36 AM) I highly doubt he will play CF at the Major League level. He is already huge and at 22 his body may not be done filling out yet. He is clearly destined for a corner. Lots of SS are destined for 3B too, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't play SS while they can. There's no harm in letting him fill a position he can handle now if the team needs it and its a way to get him in the lineup.

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 03:50 AM) This thread is ridiculous. With our market/payroll, you play to win every year. I can't believe I'm reading people say, "I want to lose next year." I refer you all to the Pirates/Royals/Padres of the late 90s/00's. Handfuls of early 1st round picks, nothing to show for it. Look at 1st rounds in the last ten years. Your first five picks will produce 2-3 MLB starters and then the last 25 picks of the round will give you 4-5 major league starters. You play to win the game. Picking #7 as opposed to #17 rarely makes a difference. This isn't the NBA/NFL. No one WANTS to lose, that's why we want to get rid of our s***ty group of players and start building a better team so that we can win as soon as possible. It's more ridiculous to assume that rolling out the same set of bums again will yield different results.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2013 -> 06:29 AM) I mentioned in another thread the year the Sox drafted Aaron Poreda, 4 of the top 8 picks have lower career WARS than him, and He wasn't exactly stellar. So hoping a team is miserable all summer just for a high pick usually doesn't work out as well as it does in other sports. I would argue that there is a different draft class every year and that it isn't useful to choose one random year to make a prediction about the future. You could also look at the 2010 draft and argue that it's crucial to get into the top 3 because you can get a generational talent there but there's a huge dropoff in talent at number 4 (Chris Sale notwithstanding), and it would be equally useless.

Rios/Ramirez, perhaps.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 04:41 PM) Not sure if this has been posted, but this is a great swing by Garcia. From what I've seen, a lot of his homers in the minors this year were to the opposite field http://www.milb.com/multimedia/vpp.jsp?content_id=29090845 Unrelated to Garcia: Wow, what a meat ball haha

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 04:12 PM) Really? Because he's a member of the White Sox? How about this from February November? http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/...sider-keith-law but no he's White Sox and Law says death to everything White Sox EDIT: I would like to add this in, which I found interesting. From Tigers Prospect Report: http://tigersprospectreport.wordpress.com/...avisail-garcia/ So Keith Law hates the White Sox AND Tigers? That doesn't seem right, does it? Now, I would suggest looking up any team and Keith Law, and you will find that Keith Law does not "like" many teams. Thank you. Keith Law definitely seems like a pompous jerk, but he's equally jerky to everyone, and he sure as hell knows what he's talking about.

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 04:10 PM) A 4-5 of Dunn and Hart could generate more power than most 4-5's in baseball. If one of Garcia or Viciedo takes off were in business. The idea wasn't to knock people out of the park, the idea is to give us a competitive line up with young players playing for their future AND real MLB hitters. Our pitching is good enough to be top 5 in the AL, if our offense is competitive we can surprise teams. I would rather try 3-4 guys who may be a part of the future and be competitive then play a bunch of minor leaguers and waste our pitching. We all want to win, man. We don't like punting next year any more than you do. But dude, this is a team with a .388 winning percentage. Horrible defense AND horrible offense. And the pitching is good, not elite. Corey Hart and Michael Young don't make this team a winner.

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 03:55 PM) We are two bats and a couple of relievers away. CF De Aza 2B Beckham 3B Michael Young DH Dunn/Viciedo 1B Corey Hart RF Garcia LF Viciedo SS Ramirez C Phegley Gillaspie gets some starts at 3B against RHP with Young going to 1B and Hart going to RF giving Garcia/Viciedo days off against RHP. Sign two guys on short deals and have four younger guys (Beckham, Viciedo, Garcia, Phegley) who you can learn if they are part of the future. De Aza, Dunn and Alexei you basically know what you're getting. Replacing Rios with Hart and Young will help the attitude of this team. 1. Sale 2. Quintana 3. Danks 4. Santiago 5. Johnson/Rienzo/Axelrod QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 04:10 PM) A 4-5 of Dunn and Hart could generate more power than most 4-5's in baseball. If one of Garcia or Viciedo takes off were in business. The idea wasn't to knock people out of the park, the idea is to give us a competitive line up with young players playing for their future AND real MLB hitters. Our pitching is good enough to be top 5 in the AL, if our offense is competitive we can surprise teams. I would rather try 3-4 guys who may be a part of the future and be competitive then play a bunch of minor leaguers and waste our pitching.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 01:46 PM) From Keith Law.. "What you think of the White Sox' return for Peavy depends largely on what you think of Garcia. I've long held that he's an extra outfielder, or below-average regular, a player with some tools but very little baseball skill or instincts, especially at the plate where he appears to have no plan at all." Surprise suprise! He hates a player the White Sox love! In other news, the sun rose in the East this morning Nothing's wrong with Keith Law -- Garcia is a bag of tools that doesn't know how to hit yet at the Major League level.. This is a perfectly rational opinion. So far in the MLB, he's swung at 41% of all pitches he's seen OUTSIDE OF THE STRIKE ZONE.

Here's a serious question: If I can talk Dan Szymborski into doing an MS Paint drawing for our banner, would you guys use it?

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 03:29 PM) How about Greg Nawton? Yes! Nawwwton!

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 03:06 PM) Yeah, Joe Crede belongs nowhere near that group I do like the idea of a legends banner, but preferably with slap hitting Latino bench players. Timo, Pablo, and Paco are the first 3 on the list. Paco Martin! Honestly, I'd like to See Craig Grebeck, Lyle Mouton, and Ron Karkovice.

Cistulli remains obsessed with Semien, there's some cool video of him here: http://www.fangraphs.com/not/otgraphs-vide...-if-chicago-nl/

QUOTE (Jose Paniagua @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 07:38 AM) Well if you read the rest of the article, he actually feels great about the trade from the BOS perspective QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 07:45 AM) He's not saying that it's a bad trade for Boston. He is implying that two years ago, Boston would rather stand pat on win the wild card than spend $20 mil on Peavy and give up a few prospects. But the randomness of the new wild-card game forced them to be aggressive and go for the division. Yeah, I get that. I'm just saying that it seems like consensus is that this is a no-brainer trade. It really wasn't all that "aggressive" to give up your pre-season #12 prospect and some ranom org guys for the best pitcher on the market with 2 years of control. I can't believe they wouldn't make that deal even with only one wildcard.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 07:23 AM) Two years ago, the Boston Red Sox do not make this trade. They do not give up Jose Iglesias and his metallurgical glove, they do not cede an A-ball pitcher named Frank Montas whose fastball pops triple digits on radar guns, they do not bother saying yes to two more prospects named Cleuluis Rondon and J.B. Wendelken. This trade happened because of the second wild card. With money and prospect capital to spend, the Red Sox looped in the Tigers, who needed a shortstop to replace the soon-to-be-suspended Jhonny Peralta, and got them to send outfielder Avisail Garcia to the White Sox as Chicago’s centerpiece of the trade. It strengthened Detroit, and Boston was OK with that, because October is a crapshoot. http://sports.yahoo.com/news/red-sox-motiv...-063933783.html So interesting how differently this guy sees this. Looks like highway robbery by the Red Sox to most, it seems.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 12:58 AM) You didn't say I couldn't name one but give me your example of what you mean is terrible plate disciplne for a 21 year old who hit .380 . It's his 22-25% strikeout rates and 3-5% walk rates every year. and the fact that his O-Swing im the majors is 41%, FORTY ONE PERCENT: http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playe...amp;position=OF That kind of stuff often works out in the minors against bad pitchers that can't locate consistently, but you can count on one hand the amount of above average Major Leaguers that have that level of hackitude. Once the league figures out where the holes in the swing are, they start feeding you nothing but what you can't hit, and if you refuse to stop swinging at it, you tend to suck. Obviously he might learn to be better, but it doesn't happen often, and I've NEVER seen it happen in the White Sox system. I'll be very excited if he's the first, but I'm disappointed that Hahn -- especially if he was going to settle for just one notable prospect -- couldn't leverage Peavy into a guy that's more polished than this for his age.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jul 31, 2013 -> 12:18 AM) So you hate Yasiel Puig ? Yeah, cherry pick the 1 in 1000 that works out. Vladimir Guerrero was good too. Name some more for me.

I'm just tired of watching guys with horrible hitting approaches and hoping that they learn.

Why does everyone think DET got hosed? They just improved their infield defense -- their biggest weakness by far -- by about 200%. They're the team in the Majors that needs offensive production from their SS the LEAST.

QUOTE (Paulstar @ Jul 30, 2013 -> 10:31 PM) The guy is 22, has the tools to be an above average defensive RF (who knows, possibly better), and 20-20 potential. Even if he never develops great plate discipline or sees his average in that .300 range in the majors, he should still make for a solid RF for several years (a lot better than dealing with Rios out there). Plus, if there is no cash involved, I'm actually getting excited at what might happen tomorrow at the deadline. People here were expecting the moon for Peavy, and in all actuality, this is looking like a really solid deal for the White Sox. I hope he develops just as much as you do, I'm just seeing no evidence of the Sox being able to turns these types of players into anything close to productive major leaguers.